Facebook Toon of Day
l3wis 
September 2012
“How much would it cost to change the name of SF to ‘Sanford Falls’ ?”
You need to watch this Listening and Learning session. The above question was the most hilarious. But there was several good moments.
What is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)?
“MOU, IOU or a raincheck, what’s the difference?
Recently at the last SF City Council informational meeting, (FF 2:40) Councilor Kermit Staggers and Parks director Don K. brought up MOUs. Well what are they?
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is a signed non-obligating and legally non-binding document that describes the intentions of the alliance members to work together to address a shared development challenge. In some cases, companies (and particularly their legal departments) may use the term MOU to refer to a legally binding document. In this situation it is imperative that all parties understand and agree that the document is non-legally binding; if helpful, you may change the term “MOU” to a term used by the organization to refer to a non-legally binding document (e.g., “letter of intent” or “partnership agreement”).
Do I Need To Have A MOU For My Public-Private Partnership?
MOUs are not required for public-private partnerships, but they are strongly recommended. They are frequently used when USAID and a resource partner are providing parallel funding to a common implementing partner. They are not typically used when a resource partner is receiving USAID funds through a Collaboration Agreement, because the Collaboration Agreement itself addresses the kind of information set forth in an MOU. They are also typically not used when the alliance consists only of a gift from a resource partner to USAID, where the resource partner is providing no other in-kind contributions and does not expect to be involved in the alliance activities. Consult with your Regional Legal Advisor or the General Counsel’s office to determine whether a MOU is appropriate for your proposed alliance.
What Are The Benefits Of Using A MOU?
There are many benefits to formalizing your partnership through a MOU. The MOU
- Ensures that all parties are in agreement on the partner roles and activities, thereby decreasing misunderstandings and future conflicts.
- Outlines how decisions about the partnership will be made during implementation.
- For many alliances, represents the only document that formalizes the relationship between USAID and a private sector partner (that is not also an implementer).
- Can help keep the partnership on track and focused on the original objectives/activities.
- Provides an easy framework to allow additional partners to join and expand the partnership.
The key words here are ‘non-obligating and legally non-binding document‘ and it seems the city is moving forward with MOUs when it comes to financially supporting special interests and club sports. This is unfortunate. Why? Because when these ‘groups‘ don’t come up with the money they promised to raise there is NOTHING legally binding them to come up with it. What does that mean? That means taxpayers are on the hook for the shortfalls. Councilor Staggers suggests that we get away from MOUs and require the clubs to ‘show us the money’ before we cut them a check, he says it is about ‘Accountability’. Of course Donny K. doesn’t have a problem with them, well, because it’s not his money that is on the hook when these ‘groups’ fail to hold up their end of the deal. I think the whole conversation ended perfectly with Staggers telling Donny K. “Then they better get it together.”
Snow Gates; Letter to the editor
Snow Gates petition drive organizer, Theresa Stehly wrote a great letter to the editor yesterday;
Our community leaders have supported spending tax dollars on many quality-of-life projects in the past. The cost and effectiveness often takes the back seat to what is perceived as the benefits these projects will bring to the people who want them and will use them. Providing snowgates in Sioux Falls is a service that would help everyone in our city. We feel it is a project worth the effort.
Why We Should Not Legalize Marijuana?
Since my blog, Decorum Forum gets a steady 79 hits a day, why, you ask would I want to pander to the audience of the likes of that which reads South DaCola?
First, because its moderator allows me to do so from time to time. Second, South DaCola recognizes the significance of a campaign of a series of short letters to the folks whom are shortly going to be adding to the panoply of rules, enforced by people with uniforms and guns, that govern every aspect of your being.
People who use cannabis are quite conscious of the “uniforms and guns” part of the deal. Since cannabis poses absolutely no threat to public safety, it must be the presence of the insane Prohibition on its existence within the borders of the USA (and a few other barbaric countries) that is the threat to public safety.
I was checking out current arguments for Prohibition the other day. I asked on Google:Â “why keep pot illegal?”
Its author proposes, among other equally coherent groupings of words:
Legalized gambling has not reduced illegal gambling in the United States; rather, it has increased it. This is particularly evident in sports gambling, most of which is illegal. Legal gambling is taxed and regulated and illegal gambling is not. Legal gambling sets the stage for illegal gambling just the way legal marijuana would set the stage for illegal marijuana trafficking.
The gambling precedent suggests strongly that illegal drug suppliers would thrive by selling more potent marijuana products outside of the legal channels that would be taxed and otherwise restricted. If marijuana were legalized, the only way to eliminate its illegal trade, which is modest in comparison to that of cocaine, would be to sell marijuana untaxed and unregulated to any willing buyer.
Let me get this straight. That is supposed to be an argument against legalization of cannabis?
Thinking that the preceding words might not clearly state the “mainstream” of arguments in favor of continuing to jail people for cannabis “offenses,” I browsed a few other Prohibitionist sites. I swear, the essay at is the best they have.
So, Why IS cannabis Prohibited?
That’s a question SoDakNORML is asking of current and aspirant South Dakota legislators in a weekly postal letter that asks for their positions on cannabis Prohibition and for their reasoning on the issue. The letters also each present one or two facts about the destruction caused by jailing people for trying to feel better by means of a vehicle not approved by The State.
If you’re interested in liberty and justice and stuff like that, take a look.
It’s also possible that Dakota War College will see this post and get heartburn. That’s the best reason to pander to the audience of South DaCola.